The realm of scientific publishing has undergone remarkable transformations over the decades. In the period before the 1960s, articles typically featured an average of just two authors. Today, however, collaborations have blossomed into multi-author endeavors, reflecting a vibrant shift that embraces teamwork across disciplines. This evolution can be attributed to a variety of factors, including changing incentives for researchers to collaborate and the unprecedented advancements in communication technologies that make collaboration more efficient than ever before.

While this increase in authorship diversity brings exciting new possibilities for innovation, it also presents significant challenges in terms of authorship attribution and accountability. The insightful work of Dr. Drummond Rennie and colleagues, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, highlights these pressing concerns.1 They argue that as the number of authors continues to rise, the traditional authorship model has become increasingly insufficient. This is primarily due to the growing specialization of contributions and the complex dynamic among coauthors, which can often obscure credit and responsibility. As they keenly point out, “credit and accountability cannot be assessed unless the contributions of those named as authors are disclosed to readers.” This statement underscores the urgency for a more transparent system.

To navigate these challenges effectively, we must embrace a more sophisticated approach that honors the unique contributions of every author involved. This is where standardized terminology comes into play, clearly defining various roles and ensuring that credit and accountability are equitably distributed. The Contributor Roles Taxonomy, commonly referred to as CRediT, serves as an invaluable tool in this endeavor.2 Developed collaboratively by the research community, this open-standard framework significantly enhances our understanding of the diverse contributions within scholarly work.

The CRediT taxonomy outlines 14 distinct types of contributions, helping to clarify the varied roles authors may play in a research project: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing - original draft, and Writing - review & editing.

By implementing the CRediT framework across academic journals, we have a remarkable opportunity to revolutionize authorship attribution, fostering transparency while promoting fair recognition of contributions. This initiative could lead us toward the development of author-centric tools that track credit and impact more effectively, thereby addressing existing inequities within contemporary authorship models.

In light of this exciting movement, the Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science is thrilled to announce the adoption of the CRediT taxonomy, starting with our very first issue of 2017. As the Editor-in-Chief, I wholeheartedly encourage all authors of reviews, research articles, and case reports to familiarize themselves with the CRediT framework. Embracing this taxonomy is vital for achieving transparency in author contributions and is a significant step toward enhancing the integrity of our scholarly communication.

https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2017.47.1.1